Muhammed Nissam vs State of Kerala

S.S. Satheesachandran, J.—Petitioner is one among the accused A5 in Crime No. 2/2013 of Excise Range, Mattancherry registered for the offences punishable under sections 20(b)(ii)(A) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, for short the NDPS Act. Petitioner arrested on 12.4.2013 and then remanded to judicial custody, has filed the above application u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for short the Code, seeking his release on bail. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the crime solely on the basis of statement given by an other accused and he is totally innocent. At any rate his continued detention is not essential for completion of the investigation of the crime, is the further submission. He has already suffered detention for more than six weeks is also canvassed by counsel to urge for his release on bail on conditions.

Opposing the application learned Public Prosecutor submitted that investigation has revealed the complicity of petitioner as a supplier of hashish oil. Further probe is absolutely essential to apprehend his associates, and, release of petitioner at this stage will not be conducive to justice, is the further submission. The materials gathered by the investigating agency, it is submitted, have disclosed that he purchased hashish oil seized in the present case from fourth accused (A4) and supplied it to third accused (A3), who in turn supplied it to accused No. 1 and 2. Operation of over sale of narcotic drugs receiving valuable consideration has been continued by petitioner for last few years, and, as such, detailed probe thereof is warranted and his release at this stage will hamper investigation is the further submission of Public Prosecutor. Case Diary has been produced for my perusal. Going through the Case Diary it is seen accused A1 and A2 were apprehended with possession of 180 gms. of hashish oil and thereupon the crime was registered. The investigation of crime disclosing the complicity of the third accused, he was also apprehended and that time he had in his possession 25 gms. of hashish. Investigation disclosed that fifth accused through fourth accused supplied hashish oil to third accused for valuable consideration. Thereupon both the above accused (A4 and A5) were arrested by the investigating agency. The materials gathered by the investigating agency give enough room to suspect the complicity of petitioner in the illicit transit and sale of narcotic drugs over a period of time, for valuable consideration. Mobile phone call details of accused persons collected by investigating agency are yet to be checked and, evidently, investigation is only at the preliminary stage. Having regard to the gravity of the offences imputed and taking note that the investigation of the crime is only at the preliminary stage, and further, reasonable ground to suspect complicity of some more persons, associates of the accused, in the illicit operation of the narcotic drugs, is borne out, I find release of petitioner at this stage will not be conducive to justice.

Petition is dismissed.